Posted on 03/20/2009 8:00:32 AM PDT by Colofornian
So, HBO is at it again, trying to attract attention -- and, consequently, subscribers -- by outraging the Mormons. Can we really blame them?
Offending Latter-day Saints by mocking or misrepresenting our faith has proven to be a very lucrative business, after all.
Take, for example, Jon Krakauer's inflammatory bestseller, "Under the Banner of Heaven." The book, which was released in July 2003, tells the story of two Mormon fundamentalists who brutally murdered Brenda Lafferty and her infant daughter, claiming they acted on divine revelation. Krakauer attempts to prove that such behavior has roots in the history of Mormonism, and compares faithful Mormons to extreme Muslim terrorists.
Understandably upset by the soon-to-be-published manuscript, the Church pre-emptively released a statement condemning Krakauer's assertions. The LDS community immediately responded with defensiveness, anger and boycotts.
Apologetics harshly denounced the book, questioning Krakauer's credibility and intentions.
And what was the result? The controversy fanned the flame, and the book went on to be a bestseller.
When we, as LDS, go out of our way to express outrage and indignation (however righteous it may be), we pique others' curiosity. People begin wondering what all the fuss is about and, in the Krakauer case, they pick up a title that never would have caught their attention otherwise. Some of those were likely persuaded by the author's unfounded accusations; others were not.
In any case, we should have learned a lesson from this ordeal.
And yet, when HBO revealed a couple weeks ago that they would be recreating the endowment ceremony for their polygamy-themed drama "Big Love," the Mormon community was up in arms all over again.
Now don't get me wrong. I find HBO's decision abhorrent, and I can hardly fathom how executives ethically justified using a highly sacred religious ceremony for the purposes of entertainment. I think the Church said it best in its official statement: this depiction was done in "appallingly bad taste."
But in that same statement, titled "The Publicity Dilemma," the Church explains why it does not call for boycotts: "Such a step would simply generate the kind of controversy that the media loves and in the end would increase audiences for the series."
Individual members, of course, are free to boycott whatever they want. But is it worth it? Very rarely have such boycotts actually persuaded media outlets to cancel planned programming, or book stores to pull books from their shelves. If I had a subscription to HBO, I would likely cancel it once I heard about this episode, but I would do so privately. I would not make a public spectacle of my disapproval.
It would seem more productive to invite my neighbors to temple visitors' centers or open houses so that they themselves can understand why HBO's actions were inappropriate.
To avoid fanning the flame of controversy in the future, I believe we should try to avoid the "shocked and appalled" syndrome. Keeping our eyes peeled for potential attacks on our faith will almost always lead to an over-reaction on our part and, consequently, more attention given to our aggressors.
Maybe, then, we can put the Mormon-mocking industry on the list of bailout-beggars.
Why? Why the nuclear outrage & collective freakout?
From the column: Krakauer attempts to prove that such behavior has roots in the history of Mormonism, and compares faithful Mormons to extreme Muslim terrorists.
Well, to make this kind of comparison, you have to have a recipe of violence & faithful Mormons.
Krakauer highlighted how one of the Lafferty Brothers was a one-time LDS bishop -- and the Lafferty family itself was mainstream -- not originally fundamentalist Mormons! And it certainly wasn't Mormon mavericks who committed the original 9/11 atrocity -- the Mountain Meadow Massacre -- in 1857.
I wonder when Freepers of this persuasion will figure this out. In their zeal to call us all haters and bigots, they only drive people to examine their claims as well as ours. We seem to be coming out on top of the truth examinations.
Ping
So when curiosity is piqued, what is the net result?
There, fixed it...
And calling non-Mormons who point out inconsistencies in their belief system *haters* and *bigots* is exactly what on their part?
Something besides hatred and bigotry?
I can speak first hand, that after viewing the endowment ceremony depicted in Big Love, I actually came away with an admiration for the Mormon Church. If the producers of the show wanted to use the ceremony to vilify and ridicule the Church, they completely missed the mark with me.
As a practicing Catholic who misses the Latin Mass and the other rituals of the Church, I can appreciate the rituals and ceremonies of the LDS.
How did HBO misrepresent their faith?
(Ever notice how LDS make wild claims & expect everyone to believe them @ face value -- minus specifics or documentation?)
No, the LDS goes out of their way to express outrage and indignation, we give the MSM just what they want.
So if the MSM is doing stuff to get a rise out of the Mormons, the Mormons are giving them exactly what they want and providing all the more reason to keep it up.
The best way to make someone stop, is to ignore them.
No reaction takes all the fun out of it. The MSM will find someone else to pick on.
I'm not sure. That was their claim, not mine.
Seems to me that when someone tells the truth about them that they are embarrassed about outsiders seeing, they claim they are being misrepresented.
This is a true statement by the columnist...but, of course, w/LDS you have to look at what they conveniently leave out...and that is that the Mormon fundamentalists involved in this were from a mainstream Mormon family -- with one of the Lafferty brothers becoming an LDS bishop. In fact, the murder victim was their sister-in-law and her daughter.
I guess it's just not proper P.R. protocol to highlight this reality. (Just blame it only on fundamentalism)
The fact is: fundamentalist Mormonism has always been the Mormon family stepchild or "sister wife" of the family. 19th century Mormonism was in fact "fundamentalist" as the term is now used!!!
Nothing Biblical by the standards of Catholicism to be sure, but as I believe LDS follows the Book of Mormon, which purports to be a different and newer testament, I tried to be objective and not view the ceremony with the jaundiced eye.
I was impressed with the solemnity of the ceremony, it’s importance to the participants, is all. My post was in response to a question asked by someone up thread how a non-believer viewed it.
'Tis a wide chasm 'tween fundamentalist Mormons and fundamentalist Christians.
We all know that HBO is now obligated to attack the Mormons because the Mormons were on the godly side of the Proposition 8 issue. But what the Mormon church is so outraged about is that they have had their occult worship exposed. But what is really more damaging to Mormonism? The revelation that their worship is occult, or the revelation of the exact look of that occultism?
Frankly, if they’d just let the sunshine on the fairly blah occult ritual, well, first off it would be no longer occult by definition. Secondly, people would see that it’s not THAT wierd. A little off-putting, but far less off-putting than, say, banning parents from seeing their own children’s marriage. I just don’t get it.
As far as the Mountain Meadow Massacre: OK, it happened on September 11. Ok, it was an atrocity. But the current Mormon church, as theologically coo-koo as it is doesn’t deserve to be compared with the Religion of Death (except in its theological similarities.)
As it is the temple ceremony is taken very seriously and there has been a lack of that in some areas of Christian life.
That was what attracted me as a born and bread Methodist to the Orthodox Church. While I fully enjoyed the more modern worship experience, the modern music and such, I also knew that there was a seriousness that sometimes was lacking.
The perfect world has a blend of both in my mind, solemn services and joyous celebrations, all in their own time with a sense of proportion for each.
You we not commenting on the beliefs, just the attitude and approach, and that is very fair.
I don't think Krakauer openly compared the LDS church to Muslims -- other than opening some implication doors of what religious fundamentalism can be reduced to. It was this columnist's assertion that Krakauer had done so.
My assertion was not to focus on Muslim equivalency of terror -- as if any religion could compare to that -- but to highlight that what Krakauer said is true -- there's a violent side among Mormons as well.
We not only have Mountain Meadow Massacre, the Lafferty brothers, the other fundamentalist murders, but we also have...
...the Hoffmann bombings in Utah [this is a person who was in direct contact with the highest officeholders in the church],
...a sex offender rate (state of Utah) that's within the top 10-11 in the country...
...Utah's had high suicide rates over the past decade [self-violence]...
...and Salt Lake City has had a significant problem with domestic violence issues over the years.
Historically, there was also the attempted assassination of Missouri Gov. Boggs in the early 1840s...
Porter Rockwell, known as "the destroying angel" was arrested for that charge and released due to lack of direct evidence. Rockwell was implicated in numerous murders and was a member of the infamous violent Mormon Danites.
Another LDS bodyguard was Wild Bill Hickman...Wikipedia entry: Around Sept 1871, while under arrest for the murder of Richard Yates years earlier, Hickman wrote an autobiography/confession in which he confessed to numerous murders. Years later, his confession was given to J.H. Beadle, who published it under the sensational title Brigham's Destroying Angel...
Hickman, Rockwell, Danites, and the Fancher party executioners -- these people -- with two of them bearing "destroying angel" nicknames -- were all in the founding generation of Mormonism -- and left this violent legacy to its spiritual ancestors. It's no wonder we haven't seen this violence dry up when its very foundation was built upon murder and mayhem like destroying printing presses.
As a practicing Catholic who misses the Latin Mass and the other rituals of the Church, I can appreciate the rituals and ceremonies of the LDS.
I was impressed with the solemnity of the ceremony, it’s importance to the participants.
Before you decide you "admire" the Mormon Church and/or its Temple Ceremony ...
You should read these Questions for Your [Mormon] Temple Tour, and watch this reenactment of the actual Mormon Temple Ceremony, while paying special attention to:
Note:
Each of these terrible things is, or has been, an integral part of Mormon Temple Rites. The portrayal of pastors as satanic stooges, prayers for the overthrow of the US Government (as punishment for Mormon persecution) and the chanting of "Marvelous Lucifer" in Hebrew were eliminated a few years ago because of protests received after outsiders learned about them – despite Smith’s stern admonition that the ceremony was received directly from god and could not be changed upon penalty of death. All of the remaining practices are performed to this day.
Yeah, and the burning of heretics and the Spanish Inquisition was once an integral part of the Roman Catholic Church, of which I am a practitioner.
I get it. You hate Mormons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.